Hands on: Canonical aims for the cloud with new Ubuntu One

Canonical is preparing to launch Ubuntu One, a new Web service that will offer …

Canonical, the company behind the popular Ubuntu Linux distribution, is preparing to launch a new Web service called Ubuntu One, which will bring cloud synchronization and collaboration features to the Linux desktop. The service is under heavy development, but it is expected to be ready for widespread use when Ubuntu 9.10, codenamed Karmic Koala, is released in October.

Canonical began inviting Ubuntu community members to participate in a closed beta test on Monday. Ars took it for a spin to see how it performs, also speaking with Canonical engineer Elliot Murphy and product manager Matt Griffin, who described the technology behind Ubuntu One and provided some insight into Canonical's future plans for the service.

Ubuntu One will support tight desktop integration. To achieve that goal, the developers are building client software that will make the service a seamless part of the desktop experience. The software is currently available to beta testers in an Ubuntu Personal Package Archive (PPA) hosted on Launchpad. The source code will be released soon under open licenses and is said to be usable on other Linux distributions.

Ubuntu One file sync

At the current stage of development, the primary feature of Ubuntu One is file synchronization. The client software creates an Ubuntu One folder in the user's home directory and will keep the contents of this folder synchronized across multiple computers. The software will detect when files are modified on the local filesystem and will upload the changes to the Web service, which will then propagate the data to the rest of the user's computers.

Ubuntu One users will get 2GB of storage for free. Additional storage will be available for a price. According to the Ubuntu One website, users can get 10GB for $10 per month. Murphy says that Canonical is still trying to determine the best pricing structure. The cost of the 10GB plan could change in the future as Canonical attempts to make the service more competitive.

The synchronization software integrates with GNOME's Nautilus file manager. Special emblems are displayed on the file icons to indicate their synchronization status. The file manager will also show a special bar when the user is viewing a folder that is controlled by the synchronization software. The bar includes a button that can be used to connect and disconnect from the Ubuntu One service.

Individual folders that are stored on Ubuntu One can be shared with other users. This feature can be activated in Nautilus through the right-click contextual menu. You specify the e-mail address of the user with whom you wish to share the files, who will then receive an e-mail that asks him or her to confirm the share invitation. If the user confirms it, the folder that you shared will automatically appear in that user's "Shared With Me" folder. Support for sharing is still a bit limited, but the developers say that the software will provide more powerful and flexible sharing options as it matures.

An Ubuntu One shared file invitation

Ubuntu One shared files in Nautilus

The Ubuntu One website provides a simple Web interface that makes it possible for users to manage and access their files from anywhere, including computers that don't have the client software installed. Murphy says that the current implementation of the Web interface is primarily a placeholder that has been made available for testing purposes and that it will be replaced soon with a much nicer version that is currently under heavy development.

Ubuntu One's synchronization functionality is very similar to that of Dropbox, a file sync tool that we looked at last year. Ubuntu One lacks some of Dropbox's advanced features, such as support for file versioning and history. Dropbox is also ahead in performance and offers a few other unique advantages, like cross-platform compatibility.

Murphy says that Canonical does not plan to build native Windows and Mac OS X clients for Ubuntu One, but he says that third-party developers could potentially do it by porting the underlying components of the Linux client to other platforms and then building platform-specific shell integration features on top. He remarked that Canonical will happily accept patches that aim to accommodate such efforts. He also said that the company intends to deliver a fully functional KDE version. In the future, WebDAV support could be provided to give users another way to access their Ubuntu One files when they use other platforms.

I think a lot of the buy in for MobileMe comes from the calendar and preference syncing. While Ubuntu One may be aiming for the preference thing, it's not there yet. And, even when it is, I don't think they are going to allow extending the web interface for things like calendars. I realize it's not an important thing for everyone, but having synced up copies of things is nice, but without access to critical data, like contacts and calendars, I'd still have to rely on another service to sync those which makes the entire premise of using Ubuntu One in the first place less practical. Especially, as the article noted, I can get much of what it offers already in other, more mature, clients.

Pretty much like Microsoft's Live Mesh. Only $120 per year seems a bit steep for 10GB.. It's a good idea to have this feature in Ubuntu though, since people are moving around more than they used to. Live Mesh is (somewhat) cross-platform (Windows & Mac), I don't gather Canonical will be making One cross-platform, though.

Even better, though, it can be utilized by 3rd party developers (and has been by many) to include synchronization support for their apps.

The big drawback with Mobileme is Apple's poor implementation. For example, iDisk access through the Finder is terrible, however, some other 3rd party apps have no such issues (of course, this could just be another FTFF issue). Another major pet peeve of mine is the poor reliability of Backup.app (which makes incremental backups). Considering how TM uses similar technology, I was really hoping Leopard would fix this, but it hasn't happened yet. Hopefully, ZFS, whenever it is implemented, will improve both online Backups and Time Machine.

I am slightly disappointed by the route Canonical has taken towards their synchronization. I wish they had gone the Mobileme route, and focussed simply on syncing application data rather than files, and providing frameworks for 3rd party developers to easily include support for sync in their apps. Additionally, I wish they would have improved on Mobileme by allowing 3rd party folks to actually provide the server tie-ins, so I could choose a service which would provide me with online space etc. that my "Ubuntu One" enabled applications would use...

Edit: Apologies to mathcreative. I did not realize there was a second page to the article. You do indeed seem to be correct, in that Canonical is making this a MobileMe type software, right down to the screen sharing, and 3rd party app tie-ins...

Well, as much as I love what Canonical did to linux, on what planet do they think they are competitive vs. Dropbox?

Dropbox offers 2 GB of cross-platform storage for free, with 50 GB for 9,99 a month or 99,99 a year. The only thing I can think of Ubuntu one can chalk up for itself is the size of Mr. Shuttleworths purse.</naysaying>

EDIT: And why do they constrain themselves to the target demographic of those who only use ubuntu/linux... I mean, wouldn't it be a great feature for ubuntu to offer seamless integration into a multi-platform workflow (which is increasingly common)?

I started writing how I thought this had a chance, and then re-read and came to:

quote:

Unlike the client components, the server software will not be released under an open source license. Canonical will keep the server software closed for now so that it can build a healthy business on top of the service.

No way. I want to run the bloody server on my fileserver. I don't want to sync my documents to some random server run by who knows who in who knows where. It's a dropbox knockoff with less functionality and all of the same problems. I already have a duplicity setup which securely backs up my documents off-site. The syncing functionality between machines on my local lan would be useful but I can stay with unison if I have to.

If you're going to leverage the "open" advantage, leverage it. If you go half-way there's no advantage. And DropBox will flatten you.

Originally posted by stahlwerk:Well, as much as I love what Canonical did to linux, on what planet do they think they are competitive vs. Dropbox?

Dropbox offers 2 GB of cross-platform storage for free, with 50 GB for 9,99 a month or 99,99 a year. The only thing I can think of Ubuntu one can chalk up for itself is the size of Mr. Shuttleworths purse.</naysaying>

EDIT: And why do they constrain themselves to the target demographic of those who only use ubuntu/linux... I mean, wouldn't it be a great feature for ubuntu to offer seamless integration into a multi-platform workflow (which is increasingly common)?

The calendar I use has 12 months in it, not 10. That would make it 119,88 per year for 50GB, which is close enough to 120 to call it even.

1. It syncs my browser info (which would be difficult with a simple file-based sync program).2. It uses web standards (WebDAV).3. It's extensible - you can write plugins to sync any kind of data.4. It's open source. There are instructions on the official website to download, configure, and administer your own Weave server.5. I know it's secure. The only data that gets sent to Weave is RSA encrypted, and I use a passphrase that doesn't get sent to Mozilla.

1. It syncs my browser info (which would be difficult with a simple file-based sync program).2. It uses web standards (WebDAV).3. It's extensible - you can write plugins to sync any kind of data.4. It's open source. There are instructions on the official website to download, configure, and administer your own Weave server.5. I know it's secure. The only data that gets sent to Weave is RSA encrypted, and I use a passphrase that doesn't get sent to Mozilla.

That sounds cool.

I would like to setup a server at home that way I can have a 500GB storage at about 90 bucks for life.

When I heard about Ubuntu One, a "cloud" OS, I assumed it would allow you to setup your own free open source "cloud". Not to buy into some junk file sharing service. Windows Live sync (formerly foldershare) has been doing this for free forever. Not to mention the cheaper paid alternatives out there.

Why did Canonical create their own closed-source alternative to Dropbox instead of contributing to Novell's iFolder? It's proven technology with clients for Linux, OS X, and Windows. Both iFolder's client and server are released under the GPLv2. With a little love I think it could be a very successful project.